this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2023
33 points (100.0% liked)

The Agora

1636 readers
2 users here now

In the spirit of the Ancient Greek Agora, we invite you to join our vibrant community - a contemporary meeting place for the exchange of ideas, inspired by the practices of old. Just as the Agora served as the heart of public life in Ancient Athens, our platform is designed to be the epicenter of meaningful discussion and thought-provoking dialogue.

Here, you are encouraged to speak your mind, share your insights, and engage in stimulating discussions. This is your opportunity to shape and influence our collective journey, just like the free citizens of Athens who gathered at the Agora to make significant decisions that impacted their society.

You're not alone in your quest for knowledge and understanding. In this community, you'll find support from like-minded individuals who, like you, are eager to explore new perspectives, challenge their preconceptions, and grow intellectually.

Remember, every voice matters and your contribution can make a difference. We believe that through open dialogue, mutual respect, and a shared commitment to discovery, we can foster a community that embodies the democratic spirit of the Agora in our modern world.

Community guidelines
New posts should begin with one of the following:

Only moderators may create a [Vote] post.

Voting History & Results

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
TheDude
imaqtpie
Difficult_Bit_1339
Seraph089
33
[Discussion] Vote mechanics (self.agora)
submitted 2 years ago by ProstheticBrain to c/agora
50 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

What kind of threshold should a vote have to pass before being implemented? Do we really want to be making changes based on a vote that only got one "Aye"? Ten Ayes? Over 50% of the user base?

What kind of vote engagement can we reasonably expect to achieve? Is it actually likely that 50% of the user base will engage with any particular vote? Are there any useful presidents out there?

Who should be responsible for counting the votes when they're over? Perhaps the OP tallies the votes and edits the post?

Is there an easy test the mods can apply to a tallied vote to allow them to check whether it's passed? Something that is not open to interpretation and results in a clear directive to make a change?

I'm also kind of testing out this discussion format as a way of generating things to vote on i.e DISCUSSION > POLL > VOTE seems to make sense.

We'll see :)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ProstheticBrain 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

The idea of opening the floor for discussion to everyone is interesting but I think that sort of means we can't use subscriber count as a way of scoring votes.

My thinking was the subscriber count is a smaller subset of the total user base and will be made up of people who are specifically invested in participating.

What happens if you have subscribers to the Agora who aren't actually part of the wider shit just works user base and who also can't vote?

[–] Barbarian 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I don't think we need to overcomplicate that at this step. We could use something like 10-20% of daily active users on the instance or something as the minimum quorum, for example. Low enough to be do-able, high enough to not be 3 dudes voting.

[–] ProstheticBrain 2 points 2 years ago

Fair point, I suppose it'll become obvious if it starts being abused.

[–] tcely 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

You have to filter the count by the instance to find the correct number.

I think a discussion for 3 days that allows anyone to participate followed by 7 days of voting, only by local accounts, makes sense.

Even if I were away for a week, I'd be likely to see the discussion before or the vote after.